ex-, USMC

Current Discharge and Applicant’s Request

Applicant’s Request:     Characterization change to:
         Narrative Reason change to:

Summary of Service

Prior Service:
Inactive:        USMCR (DEP)      19971031 - 19980727     Active:  19980728 – 20020727 HON

Pre-Service Drug Waiver:

Period of Service Under Review:
Date of Current Enlistment: 20061226    Age at Enlistment:
Period of Enlistment: Years Months
Date of Discharge: 20100513     Highest Rank:
Length of Service: Year(s) Month(s) 18 Day(s)
Education Level:        AFQT: 32
MOS: 6531
Proficiency/Conduct Marks (# of occasions): () / ()   Fitness Reports:

Awards and Decorations (per DD 214):     Rifle Pistol

Periods of UA/CONF:

NJP:

- 20091223:      Article 112a (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances)
         Awarded: Suspended:

SCM:

SPCM:

CC:

Retention Warning Counseling:

- 20090610:      For illegal drug involvement, Ecstasy usage, as identified through urinalysis confirmed by Navy Drug Lab San Diego CA LAN#S09E0130078 dated 4 May 2009

- 20091223:      For your violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ to wit: wrongful use of MDMA (Ecstasy)

Administrative Corrections to the Applicant’s DD 214

The NDRB did note administrative error(s) on the original DD Form 214:

         Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, should read: “GLOBAL WAR ON TERRORISM SERVICE MEDAL, RIFLE SHARPSHOOTER BADGE, PISTOL MARKSMAN BADGE, MARINE CORPS GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL, NATIONAL DEFENSE SERVICE MEDAL, SEA SERVICE DEPLOYMENT RIBBON, MERITORIOUS UNIT COMMENDATION”
         “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 980728 UNTIL 020727”

The NDRB will recommend to the Commandant of the Marine Corps that the DD 214 be corrected as appropriate.

Types of Documents Submitted/reviewed

Related to Military Service:
         DD 214:           Service/Medical Record:           Other Records:  

Related to Post-Service Period:
         Employment:               Finances:                 Education/Training:     
         Health/Medical Records:           Rehabilitation/Treatment:                 Criminal Records:       
         Personal Documentation:           Community Service:                References:     
         Department of VA letter:                  Other Documentation:    
                  Additional Statements:
         From Applicant:           From/To Representation:           From/To Congress member:        

Pertinent Regulation/Law

A. The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16F), effective 1 September 2001 until Present, Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT .

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs , Part V, Para 502, Propriety and Para 503, Equity .

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

Applicant’s Issues

1.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade to his discharge characterization in order to become a commissioned officer in the Marine Corps.
2.       The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance employment opportunities to better provide for his family.
3.       The Applicant contends his in-service illegal drug use was an isolated incident resulting from his learning that his father was dying.
4.       The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade.

Decision


Date: 20150319           Location: Washington D.C.        Representation:

By a vote of the Characterization shall .
By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .

Discussion

The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the Applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to discharge and the discharge process to ensure discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant’s record of service included 6105 counseling warnings and for of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): Article (Wrongful use, possession, etc., of controlled substances; ecstasy). The Applicant a pre-service drug waiver for using marijuana seven times prior to entering the Marine Corps, reaffirmed complete understanding of the Marine Corps Policy Concerning Illegal Use of Drugs before his second enlistment on 26 December 2006. Based on the Article 112a violation, processing for administrative separation is mandatory. The Applicant was twice notified of administrative processing using the procedure. The Applicant was first notified of separation for drug abuse on 22 September 2009 and rights to consult with a qualified counsel and request an administrative board. On 19 November 2009 the Applicant’s administrative board unanimously found that the preponderance of the evidence proved all acts or omissions alleged in the notification and recommended separation without suspension or retention in the individual ready reserve. By a vote of 2-1 the administrative board voted for the characterization of service to be GENERAL (UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS) with the dissenting vote recommended an UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS characterization. Before the administrative board’s discharge recommendation could be reviewed by the separating authority the Applicant tested positive for ecstasy on a random urinalysis again. The Applicant was re-notified of administrative processing using the administrative board procedure and exercised his right to submit a written statement to the separation authority and waived his rights to consult with a qualified counsel and request an administrative board. The Applicant’s administrative discharge package was reviewed by the 3d Marine Aircraft Wing Staff Judge Advocate and found to be sufficient in law and fact. The separating authority then fully reviewed the Applicant’s separation package to include considering all matters submitted by the Applicant and determined separation with an UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS characterization was appropriate.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to his discharge characterization in order to become a commissioned officer in the Marine Corps. Effective 6 February 2015, the NDRB is authorized to change a NDRB Applicant’s Reenlistment Code if related to an accompanying change in discharge characterization or narrative, but this authority is strictly limited to those cases where an applicant’s narrative reason or characterization of discharge is changed and that change warrants revision of the previously issued reenlistment code. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE-CODE” is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

: (Nondecisional) The Applicant seeks an upgrade to enhance employment opportunities to better provide for his family. The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his in-service illegal drug use was an isolated incident resulting from his learning that his father was dying. Certain serious offenses, even if isolated, warrant separation from the Marine Corps to maintain proper order and discipline. Violation of Article 112a is one such offense requiring mandatory processing for administrative separation regardless of grade, performance, or time in service. This usually results in an unfavorable characterization of discharge or, at a maximum, a punitive discharge and possible confinement if adjudicated and awarded as part of a sentence by a special or general court-martial. The Applicant agreed to accept NJP and was found guilty of violation of Article 112a after his second positive urinalysis for ecstasy. After the Applicant’s first positive urinalysis his command processed him for administrative separation and was unable to complete the separation process before the Applicant tested positive a second time. However, his command still did not pursue a punitive discharge but opted instead for the more lenient administrative discharge. The NDRB found the characterization of the Applicant’s discharge was equitable and consistent with the characterization of discharge given others in similar circumstances.

Additionally, the Applicant’s record of service and application to this board were void of corroborating evidence to support his claim of emotional distress related to the terminal illness of his father. Statements alone, without sufficient documentary evidence, are not enough for the NDRB to form a basis of relief. Even so, the NDRB recognizes that serving in the military is challenging. Most servicemembers, however, serve honorably and therefore earn their Honorable discharges. In fairness to those servicemembers who served honorably, commanders and separation authorities are tasked to ensure that undeserving Marines receive no higher characterization than is due. There is no evidence in the record, nor did the Applicant provide any documentation, to indicate he attempted to use the numerous services available for servicemembers who undergo personal problems during their enlistment, such as the Navy Chaplain, Medical or Mental Health professionals, or even the Red Cross. The NDRB determined the Applicant’s personal problems were not mitigating factors in his misconduct. Relief denied.

4: (Decisional) () . The Applicant contends his post-service conduct is worthy of an upgrade. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the re-characterization of a discharge. However, there is no law, or regulation, that provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Normally, to permit relief, a procedural impropriety or inequity must have been found to exist during the period of enlistment in question. Besides the Applicant’s statement on the DD Form 293, he failed to provide any documentary evidence on his behalf for post-service consideration. The Applicant could have provided documentation as detailed in the Post-Service Conduct paragraph in the Addendum with the recognition that completion of these items alone does not guarantee an upgrade from an unfavorable discharge as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case by case basis to determine if post-service conduct establishes that the in-service misconduct was an aberration. Without post-service documentary evidence, the Board determined the awarded characterization of service shall remain Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. Relief denied.

Summary: After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s summary of service, record entries and discharge process, the Board found Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS and the narrative reason for separation shall remain .

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing for a period of fifteen years from the date of discharge. The Applicant is directed to the Addendum for additional information.

ADDENDUM: Information for the Applicant

Complaint Procedures : If you believe the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction to the Joint Service Review Activity, OUSD (P&R) PI-LP, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-4000. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction before submitting such a complaint. The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.af.mil . ”

Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any additional evidence related to this discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required. There are veterans organizations such as the American Legion and the Disable d American Veterans that are willing to provide guidance to former service members in their efforts to obtain a discharge upgrade. If a former member has been discharged for more than 15 years, has already been granted a personal appearance hearing or has otherwise exhausted their opportunities before the NDRB, the Applicant may petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR), 701 South Courthouse Road, Suite 1001, Arlington, VA 22204-2490 for further review.

Service Benefits: The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determines eligibility for post-service benefits, not the NDRB. There is no requirement or law that grants recharacterization solely on the issue of obtaining veterans benefits and this issue does not serve to provide a foundation upon which the Board can grant relief.

Employment/Educational Opportunities : The NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing employment or educational opportunities. Regulations limit the NDRB’s review to a determination of the propriety and equity of the discharge.

Reenlistment/RE-code: Since the NDRB has no jurisdiction over reenlistment, reentry, or reinstatement into the Navy, Marine Corps, or any other of the Armed Forces, the NDRB is not authorized to change a reenlistment code. Only the BCNR can make changes to reenlistment codes. Additionally, the NDRB has no authority to upgrade a discharge for the sole purpose of enhancing reenlistment opportunities. An unfavorable “RE” code is, in itself, not a bar to reenlistment. A request for a waiver can be submitted during the processing of a formal application for reenlistment through a recruiter.

Medical Conditions and Misconduct : DoD disability regulations do not preclude a disciplinary separation. Appropriate regulations stipulate that separations for misconduct take precedence over potential separations for other reasons. Whenever a member is being processed through the Physical Evaluation Board, and is processed subsequently for an administrative involuntary separation or is referred to a court martial for misconduct, the disability evaluation is suspended pending the outcome of the non-disability proceedings. If the action includes either a punitive or administrative discharge for misconduct or for any basis wherein an Other Than Honorable discharge is authorized, the medical board report is filed in the member’s terminated health record. Additionally, the NDRB does not have the authority to change a narrative reason for separation to one indicating a medical disability or other medical related reasons. Only the BCNR can grant this type of narrative reason change.

Automatic Upgrades - There is no law or regulation that provides for an unfavorable discharge to be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct subsequent to leaving naval service.

Post-Service Conduct : The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the Applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board reviews. Documentation to support a post-service conduct upgrade includes, but is not limited to: a verifiable continuous employment record; marriage and children’s birth certificates (if applicable); character witness statements; documentation of community or church service; certification of non-involvement with civil authorities; evidence of financial stability or letters of good standing from banks, credit card companies, or other financial institutions; attendance at or completion of higher education (official transcripts); and documentation of a drug-free lifestyle. The Applicant is advised that completion of these items alone does not guarantee the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge, as each discharge is reviewed by the Board on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member’s overall character.

Issues Concerning Bad-Conduct Discharges (BCD ): Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts, issues relating to the Applicant’s innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. The NDRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

Board Membership: The names and votes of the members of the NDRB Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards
Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023